Thin sample this season. Calvin Verdonk has played 5 matches (141 min) so far, so sections that need a bigger sample to say anything reliable are not shown here — they are missing on purpose, not broken. See all seasons combined →
01
What Patterns Define Him?
His repeatable signature. A step only appears if its reliability score (sample size × match coverage) reaches at least Medium confidence — pattern mining, not anecdotes.
RECEIVE
Left Wing, Middle third — wide or inverted — mostly in the middle third (60% of his 78 passes)
85% completion · 78× in 4/4 matches
↓
PROGRESS
carry or combine up the flank
5.7 prog/90 · 9× in 3/4 matches
↓
DEFEND
1v1 and cover on his side
29 def actions · lost 30% deep · 29× in 4/4 matches
Signature: Receive → Progress → Defend — the only steps proven repeatable this season (3 of 5 in the full pattern). Not enough evidence yet for the rest of the chain below.
Not a pattern: dribble — 1× (low confidence, shown as a number only, no tactical conclusion drawn); deliver — 1× (low confidence, shown as a number only, no tactical conclusion drawn) — omitted from the signature rather than presented as one.
In possession
In possession
What he does with the ball: build-up, progression, creation, carrying and finishing.
0 key passes (0.00/90), 0 of them assists — where his chance creation specifically comes from, 18 zones (6×3), showing his share of key passes originating there.
Chance creation — key pass origin zone share
Filter:
chance creation (0)assist (0)% of the selected group's key passes originating in each zone
02
Tactical patterns — how his football actually looks
Three clustered sequence diagrams from his own event data — his three busiest routes: the way he progresses, the pattern behind his chances, and where a turnover turns dangerous.
own goal left, attacking →
How does he progress the ball forward?
His most common route for progressing play: he plays straight through the left wing, advancing it forward in the middle third — 2 passes worth 0.32 xT.
Where does he lose the ball most?
This is a RATE, not a raw count — the share of his touches in each zone that end in a turnover, so a zone he simply plays in more often doesn't automatically look riskier. His weakest zone is the left wing in the final third: 27% of his 11 touches there are lost (3 times).
29 defensive actions across the season (18.5/90). Where he wins the ball, and how — the core question for a defender. Aerial duels are not recorded for this competition, so aerial dominance is not measured here.
click a card to isolate that action type · own goal left, attacking →
5
tackles · 40% won
2
interceptions · 1.3/90
7
recoveries · 4.5/90
5
clearances · 3.2/90
3
blocks
34
avg action height
4
won high (att 3rd)
10
middle third
15
own third
Vision AI A mid-block defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 14 proactive ball-wins (8.9/90), tackle success 40%. He defends mostly around the middle third.
Team
Team context
How much of the team runs through him, and what changes without him.
Lille's output per match with Calvin Verdonk (5 matches) versus without him (3 matches). Insufficient evidence — the without-sample is only 3 matches; treat every Δ below as noise until more games exist. What his own defending should move — goals conceded and results — leads; attacking output (largely out of a defender's hands) is shown after, for context. A proper on-off model needs many more minutes.
WITH (5)
WITHOUT (3)
Δ
goals against /match
0.60
1.00
-0.40
points /match
2.20
1.33
+0.87
goals for /match
1.40
1.33
+0.07
xG for /match
1.07
1.15
-0.09
06
His Share of the Team
Of everything Lille produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Calvin Verdonk specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.
category
share
him / team
interceptions
7%
20 / 287
progressive passes
6%
94 / 1577
clearances
5%
34 / 688
Recruitment
Style and verdict
Style profile, closest comparables, and the summary.
Not raw event counts — football style scores: weighted models scored 0–100 against the 232 full-backs in the pool (min 450 min). This is what separates players who post similar numbers but play differently. Proxy dimensions are inferred from on-ball data; true off-ball running / under-pressure context is not measured.
Inverted full-back58%Overlapping full-back35%
Why Inverted full-back 58%: a weighted blend of build-up 72 (weight 35%) + progression 67 (weight 25%) + retention 43 (weight 30%) + press resistance 19 (weight 10%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
—
Strong
defensive aggression, ball-winning, creativity, final-third threat, build-up, receiving zones
Average
progression, line-breaking, transition, passing directness, territory (wide vs central), retention
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Defensive aggression
83
Ball-winning
76
Creativity
73
Final-third threat
72
Build-up
72
Receiving zones
71
Progression
67
Line-breaking
59
Transition ~proxy
55
Passing directness
49
Territory (wide vs central)
47
Retention
43
Carrying
27
Crossing
26
Box threat
24
Press resistance ~proxy
19
Through-balls ~proxy
4
Dribbling
2
08
Similar Players — in style space
Closest comparables measured on the style scores above, within the same position family — so it separates how players are alike, not just how much they touch the ball. Each line explains the shared strength and the divergent mechanism. A light physical-profile term (height / weight; this player: 174 cm / 69 kg) is included at a quarter of one style axis's weight — enough to break ties between stylistic twins, not to override style.Scope: pooled across the Ligue 1, Bundesliga, La Liga, Premier League and Serie A, percentiled within each player's own league before comparing — a match from another league is marked with its league name.
Style, not quality:a high match here means two players tend to produce the ball in similar ways — it is not a ranking, a scouting recommendation, or a claim that they are equally good.
Marc Cucurella Real Madrid · La Liga · 174 cm / 66 kg
63%
Driven by: dribbling (26%), press resistance (14%), through-balls (13%). Different mechanism — Verdonk more via territory (wide vs central), ball-winning; Cucurella more via box threat, retention.
Quilindschy Hartman Espanyol · La Liga · 183 cm / 77 kg
58%
Driven by: press resistance (21%), dribbling (17%), crossing (16%). Different mechanism — Verdonk more via defensive aggression, retention; Hartman more via through-balls, passing directness.
Álex Valle Como · Serie A · 178 cm / 72 kg
57%
Driven by: dribbling (19%), through-balls (17%), defensive aggression (13%). Different mechanism — Verdonk more via progression, final-third threat.
Benjamin Henrichs RBL · Bundesliga · 183 cm / 79 kg
52%
Driven by: through-balls (25%), dribbling (23%), ball-winning (11%). Different mechanism — Verdonk more via line-breaking, progression; Henrichs more via passing directness, box threat.
Nicolás Tagliafico Lyon · 172 cm / 65 kg
51%
Driven by: dribbling (25%), defensive aggression (14%), build-up (11%). Different mechanism — Verdonk more via territory (wide vs central), creativity; Tagliafico more via box threat, through-balls.
Flávio Nazinho Monaco · 178 cm / 72 kg
51%
Driven by: dribbling (18%), defensive aggression (13%), final-third threat (11%). Different mechanism — Verdonk more via territory (wide vs central); Nazinho more via through-balls, box threat.
09
Summary
Calvin Verdonk is an inverted full-back: 5.7 progressive passes and 1 box entries, delivering 0 key passes. Overlap-first full-back. [1v1 recovery pace and off-ball overlap timing need tracking.]
Based on 5 matches (141 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as an inverted full-back — best used in a system built around that identity.
His biggest room for growth is press resistance — even a modest improvement there would meaningfully lift his overall inverted full-back profile.
✨ This report is interactive
Click any stat card to filter its map, hover a dot for the exact match, and use the dropdowns to slice passes zone-to-zone. Nothing here is static.
← BACK TO SEARCH
